socks

"Just when I thought I was out...." Hi there shift. Dunno - I do apologize for the initial tone of my response if it seemed rasty, I did think this was a joke. Slap my asz and call me Judy, now we're serious and I want to clarify what I wrote. I was "in the Way" as they say from '68 PFAL, till about 1989, give or take. I met David earlier on in the SF Bay Area, and before going back there to Ohio. I'd met Skip M before that and we all knew some of the same people. Later I was in Way Productions at the Way Nash, Joyful Noise and played guitar and worked with that initial effort from it's inception through 1980. I left in 1980 but kept contact with the work over the years up till I left - the rest is water under the bridge. The development of "Takit" was influenced by many different people, the times and the inevitable change that occurs in an organization and it's efforts. When members were being discussed for that work DG was at the top of the list of course - his availability, etc. As it worked out he took it on and his leadership both musically and personally had a significant impact on it's initial successes. (as you'd expect). I don't know what DG meant or what happened in your conversation. DG did was in fact the initial drummer for that band. The drum chair changed after a year or so - I'm fuzzy on the who/what/when's of his leaving, it's just been a long time since all this, but he did. Michael came in at a point, sounds like others did too but I wasn't in contact with them for most of the time they were down in L.A. and only got caught up on it all years later. Anyone who was around in the early 80's there when they were on the road with the production that year saw him with them, and he was always introduced by name, of course. But Dave was part of it. I don't know what he meant by what he told you, I'm sure it was correct in the context of the conversation you were having. In some ways this isn't a big deal, definitely not to me. And while I respect their effort in that band and they did make good music that wasn't the sole goal of the effort - but it was a primary goal in why it was formed. DG was an asset and contributor to those goals - of course, he's a great musician. Like all of the Way's efforts though it wasn't completely reliant and built around single personalities. Members shifted. This isn't unusual at all in music efforts, bands, etc. TOP's roster over the years is a perfect example of that kind of dynamic. I'm sure Dave's List of Best Of's might already be loaded up - I'm sure it was meaningful to him in certain ways but he's had a busy career of great work. I realized years ago that as time passes, information and history is going to get blurry on all of this Wayfer stuff. A lot of it is now, and there are many different perspectives on events. Hope this helps in some way. Either way, play long and prosper!

Yeh, we can put this one to bed. Nighty night, sleep tight! Something's amiss, knowing Dave and everyone in the first couple iterations of the Takethat band, yeah. While I respect the players and the efforts for Dave it is likely a part of a career that's had a lot of high points. It was one for me to have heard him with them. But it was a long time ago, too. Wilie Grove, I don't think I know Willie. I've heard the name, people speak of him and I think it's all been good, but I don't think I know him personally or his playing. Sorry, vague on that. I'm biased though as you can probably tell - if Willie played with any of these guys, he's good at what he does, I'm sure. Playing with great musicians is like a good ride on the dragonfly! No argument there, just on face value. And that being the case he wouldn't need me to validate that but 2 cents are cheap around here. Dave - he would have to speak for himself. He's just so off the chart-good in his skills I'd almost have to agree that if he said he didn't play with Takit, I might actually consider that he'd gone back and changed the past through the use of some massive barrage of ghost notes played so fast that it bent time and space in such a way that he was able to go back and replace himself with someone else. I'm joking. I think. My impression of Dave over the years is that he's always been very careful and considerate of who he plays with and when. That appears to have served him well. As with his return to TOP - it's like gold and the music is top tier stuff. But Takit had some talent, and yeah, it was a great effort in my opinion. Collect your .02 cents coupon,good for a free coffee! I've been kind of a wise guy here, earlier, sorry, I don't mean to bend anybody out of shape. Live, well, long, prosper, all that stuff mah peeps! Peace out!

That's true, excartesis. But really good at it, hey? But I wouldn't tell a lie! Takit was a fine band, a collection of talent that made some very good music. Dave, Skip, Danny, on a whole 'nother level. Dean and Dan too, in different ways. Both extremely talented and dare I say "gifted" songwriters. As good as any, in their styles. The things the spirit speaks and the heart feels they were able to put out into words - what's the value of a moment of enlightenment, of healing, of warmth? They delivered more than once. Danny is still at the top of his game, a great player and I'd say he flat out kills except it's probably more like life when he does it. Really good, by other words. Had dinner with him earlier this year. Nice as the day is long, love to talk shop with him. Skip wrote some excellent music too, he was really multi-talented - sax, reed instruments, keyboards, songwriting, singing. I don't think he ever held an instrument he couldn't play. Geez, he picked up an accordion and within an hour was wailing and when he played it, it sounded cool. Anyone else - wassat? But Skip had his way of making gracious music out of anything and of course on the sax - beautiful. He was one-of-a-kind and so missed by those who knew him. But, there will come a day... As for Dave G, fuggedaboudit. Top 10 of all time on the drums. Of course he played with Takit there, for the first year or two it was, then Michael stepped in, another really talented percussionist, and a great guy, a "class act" all the way. I assume this was a joke post as it started. I like a good joke. See? Ha ha. See y'all! All my best.

Just passing through, folks. I was asked to confirm this. Yes, it is in fact true. In fact, the "Willie" noted was AKA "Willie B*" AKA Willey Brone AKA Willee Browne, all known aliases of the former Mayor of San Francisco. Yes, it's absolutely true, the former Mr. Mayor of SF was and still is a very talented but little known percussionist who did in fact work with the band "Takit" for a year or so there, don't recall if it was full tenure or not. But he definitely had some pop with the skins and at that time bore a striking resemblance to David, but only from a distance as shi t fthis has noted. Of course, upon closer inspection one would know the difference but from a distance - hardly tell 'em apart. Added information bonus for those who are still reading - the band wasn't really named Takit, that too has been kind of a mix up. Their real name was Toolkit, but there was a misprint on some early promotional material, due to a bad phone line when the initial order was made and the person ordering sneezed...."AaaaaahTallllkaaaht!" and it was misunderstood to be "Takit". So yeah, the rest is history, form taking precedence over function or something to that effect. Or affect, take it or leave it, face value and all being what it is. These statements are absolutely true as told to me by a former attendee of the Drumz and Thumbz, fellowship, a group of finger harp players who once double billed with Flower Tower, a cover band that does all TOP music, exclusively (except for their work with Rinse, a Beatles knockoff band of the cover group Raine). But don't quote me. :biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh::biglaugh:

Yeah, like I said, you can see what that was going. Thanks!

Well, it's dammed hard enough to put together a life that's meaningful to our progeny that can have lasting effect past our own lifetimes. Today we capture so much of it - an archiving issue is a coming for those who have a precious 50,000 photos stored somewhere. No one will have time to go through them, if they want to. But they'll be "there" for anyone who does and has the time and inclination. The meaningful stuff of value will be held on to and the stuff that won't fit into the next garage or closet or shelf will just go the way of all flesh. Hmmmmmmmm.....where have I read that before? For me the value of things in my life aren't attached solely to the value that others place on them. What I invest into something gives it it's value. Those closest to me know that. My kids will look at a guitar someday and it will have a value, as a collectible. I hope they hold it and feel the music that's been made with it. Or remember the times I sat and deedled on it endlessly on the couch watching TV. The value of the Way - things like the property, the trailers, the roads - those things in and of themselves have little value regardless of who views them or what they think of them or the Way. Probably the single most valuable asset we have in life is time. No one else will fully appreciate the investment of another's time the same way as that person does. We share it to the degree that we've shared that time together. If it was spent wisely and was meaningful to me that will never change, that value will always be the same - to me. For me that's the weave in the fabric of the things we pass on to each other as we come and go in this life. LIke our own stuff everything comes and goes in time, even the things we try to hold on to from those who came before. Sooner or later it passes, it has to, the world simply won't hold it all in storage. There is however lots of storage in our minds, our hearts. It stacks up, folds in, melds, and becomes the fossil fuel of future generations. "The future has a past". My goal is to make some of mine worth remembering to someone down the line, a little fuel for the next fire. And yeah, the cheap trailers and the b s, etc. etc. as noted and stated, cheap cheap cheap. Yeah, all of that - box checked.

Free the T-shirts Roy! But I bet ol' Paw gave away more than he sold. GS may be one of the best examples of a freebie on the web I've seen. I like the ads and sometimes I've wished GS would put the bucket out for a donation once or twice a year just to pay the rent and allow participants the kind of pride of ownership that would permit some serious abuse. Just kidding, but it wouldn't be a bad idea, really. Course I haven't ponied up any dinero's on my own so yeah. You can see where that's going. I think I'd only put a ditto next to WW's post. You might run your book by someone like an editor someday, just someone else that might have some experience - I think I suggested that before. Not so much for the grammar or words (and everyone - EVERYone benefits from an editor's second pair of eyes) but more to possibly condense sections of it to single chapters. I've got a book thing I've been working on for 3 years and it's not easy, I'll say that, although the first draft rolled out pretty easily. Didn't make any sense but it came out quickly. It's just a suggestion not a criticism. If I remember right you go through a series of chapters that cover a lot about relationships, diet, and a lot of stuff and how those things affect who we are and how we think. DNA too right? It's insightful and might read easier if it were pulled together a little tighter. If it's important to you that you wrote it it might be good to do that. Using the posting/thread format is tough for some things, works fine for others. I've always had a hard time with it to be honest. I don't post on any net boards but when it comes to ex-Way boards named GreaseSpot Cafe this is the one I choose. It's in fits and starts. Till the next fits...

Yeah, I'm probably cheap in a lot of ways. I HATE that I can buy something and then be expected to toss out the perfectly good box, case or container it came in. It takes some thought, little changes in how I live. I avoid packaging and bagging when I can but there's a lot you can't. I recycle but that's an industry built on wasteful practices to begin with IMO. I do it though, get some semblance of sanity out of the insanity of modern consumptive practices of which I'm a part. Self - Loathing is my middle name. But I have tools I've owned for 40 years in my shop, pliers I bought in 1973 come to mind, shoes I've worn for 10 years, fishing gear that's been in the water all over the country. I like keeping stuff I can take care of. Deals is my name in dog years. Always looking for the scam that will out scam the scammers that scammed up the pricing structure. Less is more when it's what goes out of my bank account. The type of business the Way is will always creates a budgetary environment where some are getting paid, some are getting the benefits, and some (most) aren't. Getting any. If you work for them, you get a salary (or did at one time), you get certain benefits that go along with that, be they small or not. The income supports the effort that produces and maintains the products and services. The customer pays for them. The Way never met a class it didn't charge for. There's always a donation. The Way teaches that their product - the "Word" - is priceless so don't bitch about paying a few bucks for it, for "materials" and the delivery system. Since you can't ever really pay what the "Word" is worth the fees and charges are considered miniscule by comparison. And any effort you yourself put towards it is a privilege so shuuuudup, get to work. And the real money has always come from demanding tithes and other cash $ be given to them, a gang that would make the Mafia look like cub scouts, as they don't even guarantee protection for your per centage, push comes to shove there aren't many "good fellas" in their camp. Any reasonably thoughtful fool will see sooner or later that you either take that on face value and go with it or opt out. The Way offers no alternatives, so it is what it is. I know some people find a happy medium they're happy with, but from the Way's corporate stance they only function one way and that's the way they always have and if you don't like it, beat it. It really hasn't changed a lot. The fact that the Way has assets of - what? 16 million, more? it's sitting on and still functions the way they do indicates they have a plan they're acting on - they're a tiny teeny company, a small organization and have no aggressive vision to expand their base operations. They're in maintenance mode. As a result they will be "frugal" and what they do spend won't reflect a real interest in long term quality since the long term existence of the base operation can be kept with minimal spend. Sooner or later it will crap out though, it has to but I doubt anyone there really cares to plan ahead for that. At the Way foam core will always work where wood and brick might be preferable. Build cases for the foam core to protect it, but don't build anything that will actually stand up and last for years to come. The few exceptions - the auditorium for example, don't amount to much in the long run IMO. You could probably build twice the facility today for half of what it cost in $ and labor. Just a guess, never done the math but knowing what's being done today by other churches that would be my guesstimate, give or take. Cheap? Hell yeah they're cheap. They've probably still got a Benjamin or two of mine sitting somewhere being fondled by a bean counter, even still today, keeping it warm.

When the Ozster lifts this kid up during the solo, he doesn't blink an eye, worth the view alone. A double set of balls for this kid staying on a stage with a nut throwing buckets of water around too. <br> <br> <iframe width="560" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/k1lG1y0R6sU?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

Something as serious as this may be the catalyst for him to go deep. Rather than seem like a callow cur I do agree with Kit, it's got to be tough to be Roberts Jr. He was raised in an extremely difficult world and money was involved. His Dad is one of the big promoters of the "seed faith" movement. I've all but taken O Roberts off my radar but he was certainly part of a huge movement in American religion that scraped dollars out of people's pockets, teaching the blessings of God that flow back to the giver of a gift. Like money. Jr. was raised on that. These family ministries become little empires, cash cows for the founders and often, unlike in the Way, for their families. They begin to see all of the resources of their church as their own and for their own use and have no problem livin' the life on God's people's dollar. I do pray for anyone who commits a crime like this because it's a serious offense to themselves as well as all those around them. On that level it has nothing to do with him being a minister or any of that, once you get tied up in the law like this you have many years of repercussions that affect you. If you don't clean your act up it will haunt you for years and if there's a next time it can be worse. Much worse. Course a lot of celebrities get off and go their own way with a slap on the hand but if you keep coming back it's gonna get you. Most of all I hope that he gets it together, a good start would be junking all of that theology his Dad wrapped around the giving of money and the buying and selling of God's gifts. But bottom line, anyone who chooses to kill themselves be it a drink at a time or like Robert's other son with a bullet - do it away from the rest of the world and don't put others at risk. But it's a sad waste of good life and a lesson for all, bad way to learn it but a lesson.

Well yah, no wonder these guys drink. Somebody's great grandfather somewhere had five too many and came up with the perfect name to ruin your life. Aural - that would be okay I guess. Either way - don't drink and drive. Drink and throw up on your own carpet, please but not at 93 mph.

Good point WW. :) That old promo film had Walter Cummins, "college student". Little known fact : In 1972/73, there were no trailers in the back of the property, those were added to house the incoming 4th corps. Now the little known part - In '73 all the incoming comers for the 4th Corps got letters from Howard Allen letting them know that they would need to Bring their own trailers. I know - I got a letter and we got in touch with another couple doing pricing, etc. and trying to figure out what we'd need to have, to do, to know. About a month later we got another letter saying the housing would be set up. In the interim I called Howard and also spoke to Gene Randall there and gathered the spec's on what we'd need to do - like would there be pads (concrete), or was a 5th wheel preferable (and it wasn't clear but the 5th wheel set up was looking like the best route as I recall). I'd worked for a couple months in a mobile home factory, doing wiring, so I actually had some resources for information. And yes, I was thinking that if it wasn't going to be ready we'd just wait a year or till whenever it was. Wierwille was always in a hurry. Emporia, same thing. The original set of trailers were left on flat bed through the first winter with temporary wiring for heat and lights, and no water. Showers etc were in the EOB as it was called then. Early spring they started the installs. It was an adventure at the time, but the pattern of the Way Nash at that time was that it was often short on money, then as time went on and money came in it was a matter of how to spend it.

People - anyone, all humans - need to not drink and then drive a car while intoxicated. I probably drink less in a year as some you do in a week, but I carry a little digital "breath a lyzer" gadget in my glove box, so that anytime I am out and have more than one drink I can test myself. Drinking and driving is just stupid. Preacher's are not immune to that. He was cited for driving 93 mph in a 65 mph zone Intoxicated. Throwing stones? I'd have used a big one to at least get him off the road. Geez, I don't care if he's a Mormon Scientologist Christian Scientist Pope - get that mother off the road. Dammed right he needs help. He'll have lots of it if he gets into the DUI program in his state and they won't be crying in their coffee about how hard it must be for a PK. Once you get in the belly of the beast you have plenty of time to think about it. Follow the Path of Ham - drink too much? Walk. Or call a cab or a friend. Or just fall over in the gutter. Stay out of your car. Having said that - IMO DUI law is way out of whack in the U.S. - in California it varies from county to county and isn't equitable or reasonable. I completely agree that DUI is dangerous activity. I don't agree with the laws or law enforcement on how it's managed. It's widely understood that if you have between 20 and 50 k you can get any marginal toxicity test in a first time DUI tossed out of court. For the same amount you can get the penalties minimized - if you have the money. If you don't, you're screwed. I have a feeling he'll be handled with respect.

Really good question, methinks. I picked up a book years ago by George Mackie, a missionary in the middle East. Saw it in a Border's and picked it up, it deals with "Bible Manners and Customs". In it is a part where he gave his perspectives on differences he observed in middle Eastern religious thought and Western religious thought - think he was in Syria, I've got the book around somewhere - and he put it in this way: western thought sees a God who is good and He does good things, eastern thought sees good and says God has done it. The difference is subtle and has taken me a while to digest it, still am really. I found the book when I was doing some reading after a series of events that had formed that perspective in my mind and I found it to be a real change in how I thought about what I "knew" in the bible. Somewhat intangible at first and a little hard to nail down. When I read through Mackie's book and saw that it helped. Where I went with it is not exactly what Mackie was saying but he did note that both kinds of thought could benefit from the other's perspective, in his opinion. I don't verse it as "idiom of permission" but I kind of see a relationship there....that the ongoing affairs of this life, this world, our world and lives, aren't governed so concretely by "laws" and "principles" that everything happens as a direct result of something that I do or don't do that is either aligned with or against those laws and principles. Put another way I am not the sole cause of good or evil that happens in my life nor is God the active agent in each and every instance. Rather, from my perspective, I would give "God the glory", the credit as it were, for everything that is good as best I I understand it and see it. I credit God as the creator and see Him in everything. From that view God doesn't cause catastrophic events to occur, directly. The world is man's domain and the world works as it does. If there is good in the world at all, God is the source but God does not personally cause each and every good thing to happen, nor every bad thing to happen. God "allows" both good and bad to happen. (Rain falls on just and unjust, the sun rises and sets for everyone, etc. ) It is a slightly different way to view how God "works". I see it as a way of thinking that informs many different kinds of religious and philosophical thought. For what it's worth, I've never quite gotten Bullinger's dispensational view of the Bible and this kind of thought, "idiom of permission" although he explains it. It's a little too hmm, cut and dried, "mechanical", although I see the curves of change in the bible's history. Not sure if this contributes, I'd have to dig out some more stuff to document it but for what it's worth....:)

I'll take up that cross with you Jerry. "Yet how many times did Way leaders do "word studies" that track the use of a single Greek word through the New Testament based on the assumption that the use of that word was a string of divine pearls?" Yes, the "word study" - god, don't get me started. Armed with concordance and Bible, the damage that can be done. In it's simplest form this is a wonderful study aid to the reading of the Bible. But that weird obtuse Way-kind of logic, that after some foray through the N.T. looking at the "greek word for" something, plodding through verse after verse and then coming to some quacked conclusion that made no difference to anyone about anything remotely worthwhile but inevitably tied into some great "principle" or.....geez. Yeah. Hamerstein, what think ye of this: http://www.chem.tamu.edu/class/fyp/mathrev/mr-sigfg.html It's not mine but as a launching point for discussion.... I roam the world of metrics from time to time and the ideas around "accuracy" and "precision" have taken on specific meanings to me. How would you define them, from a math perspective?

There we go with the debate again. I appreciate your post Roy, thanks. Anytime you, Loftus or anyone else actually wants to discuss anything related to or in that article, go for it. So for, not much of that's going on here. You're right about one thing - no one that Loftus is talking about is going to hear him out with that funky attitude he's got, he's trying to make people look foolish, and no one likes that. Tell you what - you get Loftus to clean his act up a little and I'll meet you both half way. Otherwise, you're not going to like what I have to say about him or his ideas. I've been kind so far. I can let it go at that. Till then, my friend.

"We don't live in a vacuum and some of us are familiar with at least one of the men whose student he claims to have been. Dr. William Lane Craig is pretty well known in Christian circles....he is an avid debater and prolific author. Dr. Craig is very up front about his education and journey, so some of us are even familiar with that aspect of the equation and when Loftus alludes to the nameless, faceless Profs he has dealt with, my mind jumps to Dr. William Lane Craig" Really, a good point. The article says that one with faith uses everything but reason and logic to define and defend their beliefs and faith. "Believers" deny, avoid, use "special pleadings" and have all sorts of personal motivations and weaknesses driving them, per JL. Atheists such as JL - none of that. According to JL, it's all reason, logic, facts just the facts, blue sky all the way. It's a case made that conveniently drops any personal motivations from one side and loads the other side up to sky with them. How convenient. I suspect that JL has turned to demeaning the opposing side simply because he's come to an irreconcilable difference in belief, in personal life, professionally, perhaps in all. Now he demeans the other side and attempts to reduce it to lesser force, marginalizing it's validity and thereby moving it off the table. But for JL I think it's clear he's not going to the next course, he's going to keep picking at that plate - and likely for both personal and professional reasons. The ideas and issues are not served by that kind of approach, from either side. One could say that "most former graduates of theological institutions are conflicted and unreasonable". That wouldn't be true though. It would conveniently disparage them however and reduce their value towards any discussion. Much as he does in his article to those "believers" he talks about.

This horse is still moving, let me fix that. (and thanks. But I will openly admit I'm not Christ Like, so we can breathe easy, I make no claims on that count and never will.) As to the writing skills of Loftus - I think he wrote rather well, and put down what he meant clearly and succinctly. I had no trouble understanding what he said and based on his other books and writings I think I got a clear idea of what he meant in this. So, as a writer, he did fine at least by me. I got his points. He wears his credentials rather large, I've seen. I don't. I actually don't have any to flaunt so it's easy but I won't blather on about the number of books, lectures, hours spent, days pondering or years working. Everyone does what they do. When the rubber hits the road we all fall out of bed pretty much the same way. That he screws around with some of the material he uses deserves to be challenged. His use of Socrates for instance - now anyone who wants to challenge my version is welcome to and it is challengeable - but I don't agree with Loftus's interepretation - that the more one knows the more one should doubt. I don't see that the socratic method is directly a use of doubt but I suppose I could be squeezing it a little or a lot........to question yes that's different than doubt though. Learning would require ongoing analysis IMO, yes and the effect of even mastering a field to one's own best ability invokes the understanding that there is still yet more to learn if one is to progress. But to doubt as a result of what one knows through learnng - in the way that I think Loftus uses it here - is simply wrong and more of an extrapolation on his conclusions, that faith is wrong and that one should doubt their faith. (and I don't believe that issues of spiritual faith are best served by external analysis as I alluded to, a subjective internal method is required and more authentic for the components of mind and thought. ) But faith as a quality of human life is normal for all humans. The fact that a "Socrates" is quoted leaves lots of room to quote a Jesus for that matter - since it's not known if a man Socrates ever actually existed. So in that way I still find it very ironic that anyone would invoke "Socratic" ideas in that way, I don't. I did at one time but my general investigation of philosophy has caused me to steer away from that. LIkewise - and this is just me - I don't always quote Jesus directly because I believe at this point that many of the basic ideas - but not all - of what Jesus is written to have said are things that can be drawn from many sources including the Torah - that's not rocket science IMO. However the "living logos" idea is very defining to Jesus Christ and provides a context to the words of the gospels that gives them meaning. Loftus has the same problem a lot of us do - he's so sure of himself or wants to be that he uses the word "most" in this piece - "most" Believers don't seriously question their faith..... You can't do that. You can, I do, he does obviously but it clouds any discussion to generalize in that way. As soon as I jump to "most" I have to validate that and the points he makes won't fully validate that way IMO. Plus any time you tell someone "you're just like everyone else" - they're likely to say no they're not. Because they're not.

Hmmmm... Did I call Lofton's writing "nonsense".............? No. Did I make fun of his writing skills? ......................... No. I originally stated that in what he had in what you posted, a "crappy attitude". I expanded on that later to include "sucky" and a couple other words. I still think so, stand by that and have no reason to change my mind. I think- His attitude towards those of "faith".......... Is crappy. Sucks. I don't like it and won't tolerate it from others or on behalf of others. I definitely won't go through this charade again but as for Lofton, he's no different than anyone else, IMO. And his frame of mind, attitude - sucks, IMO. And actually exemplifies the very things you are talking about - but for whatever reasons you don't see it. That's fine,I just want to point that out - that from my perspective you don't allow in others what you allow in him. I'm sorry people make fun of your writing skills Roy. I know you try and none of us do more than that. However - I am not making fun of his writing skills, this has nothing - nothing - not a single thing - nothing Nothing to do with his writing sklls and the skills he uses to write his ideas out. He is in fact competent in his writing skills, IMO, and does a fine job getting across what he means. It's what he means, the meaning of his words, that doesn't wash with me. I didn't make fun of Loftons' writing skills, I did disgree with him, take his ideas in that post to task and offer a point by point set of thoughts on what he did write. And for the record, it doesn't matter to me what you say to me about anything, agree with me, disagree, or whatever you want to do. I expect you to be honest and straightforward, no more, no less. A lot of people won't even do that, so in my world, if you do that you're a leg up on a lot of people. :)

All without exception? Sorry, some things will never pass. Some things go on and on and on and on and, well, on. Of this I'm sure.

<iframe width="420" height="315" src="http://www.youtube.com/embed/OXwFmPwOkOY?rel=0" frameborder="0" allowfullscreen></iframe>

The sound of a Snickers bar wrapper blowing down an empty street at 4:00 a.m. in the morning..............

Aaah! A bumper sticker?

Bumped because everyone looked much younger 7 years ago.

Glad to hear that Roy. Since no one's called Loftus any names as yet, we're in good shape. But aren't you violating your own rule? : saying nothing is the best defense